[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #10 from Inbal Levi --- Actually, you're right about the origin being [dcl.align]p5 here too, though the test cases are different. Thanks.

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- Both bugs are violations of [dcl.align] p5 though. The bug is not that GCC doesn't follow [basic.align] p1 (it does) but that it allows alignas to weaken the alignment later. GCC should not allow alignas

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #8 from Inbal Levi --- See here: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45890

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #7 from Inbal Levi --- Not exactly. 94594 is talking about object's members impose their alignment on the object's type, whether this bug is talking about object type imposes its alignment on every object of that type (notice that

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #5 from Inbal Levi --- Stumbled across another rule which might be relevant here is: [basic.align/1] [...] An object type imposes an alignment requirement on every object of that type; stricter alignment can be requested using the

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #4 from Richard Smith --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > But isn't the alignas(32) also "appertaining to that entity"? No. The alignas(32) appertains to the struct. This is specified in [class]/2: "The optional

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid --- Comment #3 from

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #2 from Inbal Levi --- Yes, you're probably right, got the wrong one. Thanks!

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 Richard Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||richard-gccbugzilla@metafoo